The Fine Print of the Mobile App Store Use and Implications for Social Media and Online Privacy: How to Unlock a Virtual Private Network

The fine print makes it a crime for anyone to distribute, maintain or update a foreign controlled application through internet or marketplace services.

Democrats on a House committee sent letters to the CEOs of Apple and Alphabet requesting that they ensure they can fulfill their responsibilities by the deadline.

There are also ways to download TikTok outside the Google and Apple app stores, through processes respectively known as “sideloading” and “jailbreaking.”

They are commonly used in countries with strict internet restrictions to access blocked social media platforms, streaming services and other geographically limited content.

A virtual private network is a method of anonymity which makes it appear as if users are browsing from another country.

“The other thing is to remember that even after this law takes effect, if it does, it will not be illegal for them to continue to use TikTok if they have it on their phones already — or even if they manage to acquire it from some other source than an app store,” she says. Individual people will not be affected by this law.

TikTok officials say it is possible that on Jan. 19, when U.S. users try to open the app, a prompt will show up indicating the service is no longer available in the country. This is what happens when someone tries to start a app in India that is banned in 2020.

TikTok and the U.S. Senate: Supporting a National Security Threat in Mobile Devices through a New High-Latinum App

“Over time … the service that you get with the application will be worse and worse and worse,” she adds, though it’s too soon to tell whether that will be a matter of days, weeks or months.

And without the ability to update, the platform won’t be able to fix bugs, add features or address security concerns. It may become incompatible with the operating system of certain phones eventually.

The Senator joined with two other senators and a congressman in filing an brief in support of the creators of TikTok. “Its principal justification—preventing covert content manipulation by the Chinese government— reflects a desire to control the content on the TikTok platform and in any event could be achieved through a less restrictive alternative,” they argued in the brief. “And its secondary justification of protecting users’ data from the Chinese government could not sustain the ban on its own and also overlooks that Congress did not consider whether less drastic mitigation measures could address those concerns.”

The Preserving Americans From Foreign Adversary Applications Act allows the government to ban foreign- owned apps that it deems a threat to national security.

The fate of TikTok — and its 170 million American users — hangs in the balance, as the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of a law that would ban the platform in the country if its China-based owner, ByteDance, doesn’t sell off its U.S. operation by Jan. 19.

But it will get harder for the platform’s users in the U.S. to access the app, says Kate Ruane, director of the Free Expression Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology (which joined an amicus brief supporting TikTok and its users’ protected speech).

It is a barrier to access the application and it is something that you would have to weigh. She asked if it was worth the effort to access TikTok or learn how to do all of the required technical things. “For a fair number of users who are casually using the application, the answer will probably be no.”

While Trump previously disparaged the app as a national security threat and even tried to ban it during his first term, he has since become a staunch defender of the platform and even asked the Supreme Court last month to pause the start date of the law in question.

Trump could choose to use his broad authority under the statute to determine that ByteDance has engaged in a “qualified divestiture” of TikTok after all, as long as it has taken certain steps to that effect.

TikTok’s Future vs. Project Texas: Is Trump Really Going to Dive or Ban the Divest-or-Ban Law?

“That’s pretty straightforward, but it’s also politically incredibly difficult to do because it would require the changing of votes for many, many, many members of Congress,” Ruane says.

Trump’s second option is to direct the Justice Department and attorney general to not enforce the law, essentially giving Google, Apple and others the option to continue providing services to TikTok.

But Ruane says that’s also easier said than done, as lawyers within those companies would still see — and likely seek to avoid — “gigantic legal risk” in flouting the law, which includes hefty penalties.

If anyone uses the service to access TikTok, they will get $5,000 per person that does that. “If you were to take the president up on his offer and continue to provide services to TikTok, even though you’re technically in violation of the law, that’s $5,000 times hundreds of millions of people.”

The third potential option has been posited by Alan Rozenshtein, an associate law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and research director at Lawfare. As he told NPR’s Fresh Air in December, Trump could “just declare that the law no longer applies.”

The deal was supported initially by the Biden administration. People close to talks about TikTok’s future say it is possible Trump brings Project Texas back, with Trump potentially determining that the agreement makes TikTok in compliance with the divest-or-ban law.